None of the Catholics I've ever known think rock musicians are going to hell. And none of the priests in church talk about that, either. But I have been to born again Christian churches where they preach about rock music being a conduit through which Satan influences the listeners.

The meme I commented on said, "Outside of their church I don't think you would find anyone to say they were even Baptists."
I used faceplam Jesus to express it would be hard to find actual believers anywhere who would agree that WBC is even a Christian organization.
The behavior of the Westboro people and the doctrine that they espouse proves that they are not Christians. Simply put, someone cannot behave in a manner opposite from what Christ teaches and actually be a Christian. I wasn't even commenting on their condemnation of rock music.

As for the "born again Christians churches" you mentioned. That phrase is a tautology because there is no such thing as a Christian that has not been "born again." Jesus said unless someone is born again they cannot see the kingdom of God.
I know that there is a distinction that people make between those believers who claim the name "born again" and others who don't. That is just a human distinction, theologically it is not necessary.

I hope those churches and preachers not only call out rock music, but country, rap, hip hop, television, movies, books, magazines, and the entire internet for being "conduits through which satan influences." Any type of media or communication can be used by satan to spread "ungodly counsel."
Satan is the prince of the power of the air, the spirit who now works in the children of disobedience. He energizes people from every walk of life, in every position and profession (especially those who have large audiences and followings) to spread ungodly counsel. But blessed is the man who walks not in the counsel of the ungodly, so I can enjoy all those forms of media and entertainment as long as I see the ungodly counsel for what it is and I don't model my life after it.

Absolute nut jobs!!
I used to live in Kansas, and every time I went to Topeka, these whackos would be standing at the end of the exit ramp with pornographic signs of 2 gay men....
My kids knew when we got off of 75 Hwy to close their eyes!!
I never understood WHY the city of Topeka allowed such lewd signs and hate language!!!

I've seen the Jesus Camp documentary. They are terrible people too. The westboro cult has brainwashed generations of children in their family. Interviews with some who "escaped" are on YouTube.
If you want a good laugh, look up the documentary "Marjoe" about the con-man who grew up as a preacher and used to do a "faith healing" con game. He exposed all his lies in that documentary. Here is a small excerpt.
https://youtu.be/V252j868jTk?t=2m12s

The Westboro Baptist Cult doesn't represent Christianity or Baptists. I thought they would disappear once their cult leader Fred Phelps died but alas...

What "theological inconsistencies" are you thinking of? Supposed inconsistencies with Christian theology in general or inconsistencies with Baptist theology in particular? It does say "reasons I'm not a Baptists" instead of "reasons I'm not a Christian."

Maybe he means theological inconsistencies such as the claim that the entire Bible is authoritative and final and absolute, yet the people who make that claim don't follow 90% of what the Bible tells them to.

I'd rather KenJ answer for himself.
As for the issue you bring up, Satan himself quoted Scripture when he was tempting Jesus in the wilderness! (Matthew 4:6; Luke 4:9-11)
Just because someone cites the bible doesn't mean they are a Christian. We've discussed before how Christianity is a 'self authenticating' philosophy meaning our source material lays down the standards for who is or is not a Christian.
Hence:
Galatians 5:19-21 19 Now the works of the flesh are evident, which are: adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lewdness, 20 idolatry, sorcery, *HATRED*, contentions, jealousies, outbursts of wrath, selfish ambitions, dissensions, heresies, 21 envy, murders, drunkenness, revelries, and the like; of which I tell you beforehand, just as I also told you in time past, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.

A person cannot live in constant hatred of other people and expect to inherit the kingdom of God!
As for "don't follow 90% of what the bible tells them to..." are you referring the the civil and ceremonial laws for the Nation of Israel? Proper hermeneutics solves that:i.imgflip.com/25ft0c.jpg (click to show)
Unless of course, you want rebellious children and homosexual killed in the streets, then you should move to any country that implements Sharia law i.imgflip.com/23amq1.jpg (click to show)

I know, I know...that was "righteous anger," so it's okay. Funny thing, that if Jesus is god, he makes the rules, so he can basically do whatever he wants and just say that it isn't breaking the rules...similar to how god says don't murder, yet slaughters the Egyptian firstborn and drowns almost every living person in a global flood.

You differentiate between civil law and moral law. How do you know which are which? Which ones apply to us today and which ones don't?

And I oppose sharia law for the exact same reason I oppose Old Testament law. Pointing out that sharia law enforces those things while simultaneously acknowledging that OT law enforces them as well doesn't seem to help your argument.

You are trying to equate a sinful outburst of wrath with righteous indignation which is a category error.

We should define our terms. 'Murder' is the unlawful taking of a human life with malice of forethought. There was noting "unlawful" about God executing judgment on a world of sinful and rebellious people, the Canaanites, or Egyptians. Just like it is not murder when the State sentences someone to the death penalty, that is lawful judgment.

The way any bible student differentiates between moral, civil, and ceremonial laws and understands what applies to us today is through diligent study.

My argument is perfectly fine acknowledging that the OT law which governed the nation of Israel was hardcore. That hardness served a purpose. It distinguished Israel as God's chosen people and it showed how serious God is about righteousness and holiness. When people say, "Christians don't live by most of what the bible teaches," they don't understand proper interpretation and application. I always think, "Do you really want someone to go Old Testament on you? Because that is what the Westboro cult wants to do."

"You are trying to equate a sinful outburst of wrath with righteous indignation which is a category error."

By calling one "sinful" and the other "righteous", you can then just say that anytime Jesus got angry, it was righteous. You're pretty much setting it up in such a way that he can't lose. It's like "heads I win, tails you lose"

"There was noting "unlawful" about God executing judgment on a world of sinful and rebellious people, the Canaanites, or Egyptians."

It's not unlawful because he writes the laws, so he can just make it unlawful for everyone else but him. And I can certainly say that it was immoral, if not "unlawful". Just like what the Nazis did. What they did was legal but still horribly monstrous and immoral.

"Just like it is not murder when the State sentences someone to the death penalty, that is lawful judgment."

Except that the state only executes one person at a time for their specific crimes. God demanded that entire cities and people groups be exterminated. That is genocide.

"The way any bible student differentiates between moral, civil, and ceremonial laws and understands what applies to us today is through diligent study."

So what are some examples of OT laws which fall under moral and which fall under civil? I'm genuinely trying to understand the difference between the two.

Do you think it's moral to stone someone to death for picking up sticks on the sabbath (Numbers chp 15)? If you could go back in a time machine to ancient Israel, would you participate in that execution?

Once was a churchgoer but not a Christian now. By 'theological inconsistency' I mean too many Baptist denominations with too many differentiations, and far more focused on what's 'conservative' as opposed to what Jesus taught and would do in situations. But I do not believe Westboro is representative of Baptists as a whole, and most certainly not of Christianity. They're their own kind of stupid, which is cloaking pure unfocused hatred in religious garb. Which is why they continued despite Fred's descent into hell.

It is indeed a tragedy that so many congregations value their own conservatism and tradition over the core of the Gospel. I would caution you, however, on the danger of confusing factional divides with internal inconsistency. In any collection of people, there will be sub-groups with differing opinions. What matters most is that any given point of view is consistent with itself and reality. Consistency with alternative views is irrelevant

I agree that the original intent has been warped by resultant interpretation, and in fact that's my argument. I'm not against the vast majority of Jesus' teachings by any means, just the twisting of them to justify modern wants and prejudices. I think Jesus as an ethical teacher is excellent; I just have problems with organized religion because it's organized to satisfy the neuroses of adherents who don't want to sacrifice their modern life and give up their non-religious values to follow the radical ideas he espoused.

i.imgflip.com/1ix0ah.gif (click to show)
That is very profound. Most modern churches have wandered away from the core teachings of Jesus, not to mention the radical nature of some of his teachings. (I'm thinking along the lines of loving your enemies, doing good to those who hate you, etc.)
I concur with Young_Grasshopper that schisms and factions within denominations is not the same as internal inconsistency or "theological inconsistency." Some denominations split over fundamental doctrine (which is good and necessary) and some split over such inconsequential things as how services are conducted. I have heard of church splits over the color of the carpet in the sanctuary. In other words, human foibles and inconsistencies shouldn't be cited to criticize the denomination as a whole (which is what some people do) and they definitely shouldn't be cited to criticize the entire Christian worldview. Thanks.

Splitting over the carpet in the sanctuary sounds like something Presbyterians would do. XD That's the church I grew up in. You've obviously thought a lot about this. Although I figure we'd disagree about may things I do agree with what you've said above. Thanks for having a thoughtful discussion. :)

I found most of my upvote gifs on imgflip. I have an entire bookmark file full of links to upvote gifs. Here is how you can keep gifs for yourself when you find them:

If you are on your computer, highlight everything in this link i.imgflip.com/22vkx7.gif (click to show) except (click to show) and right click to select "go to..." or "open in another tab" then save that new tab in your bookmarks. You can copy the hyperlink from the saved tab and use it as a comment, which makes a "clickable link." Or you can create a document or note called "upvote gifs" or whatever to keep the hyperlink copied to use as a comment later. Do that for all the reaction and upvote gifs you want to keep.

Thanks for the info. I tried it but unfortunately my work IT department, in all their wisdom (being sarcastic), have seen fit to block the page it tries to open. I'll give it a try again later and see if I can figure out a way around it.